MASTER 
NEGA  TIVE 

NO.  91-80249 


MICROFILMED  1991 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 

The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material . . . 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


KNAPP,  CHARLES 


TITLE: 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE 

LITERARY  STUDY... 

PLACE: 

CHICAGO 

DA  TE : 

[1 905] 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 


Master  Negative  if 

5L- )te>l..Hl-  3 


M 


DIBLIOGRAPHIC  MICROFORM  TARHFT 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


BKS/PROO   Books       FUL/BIB    NYCG91-B75681 
Record  1  of  0  -  Record  added  today 


I0:NYCG91-B7568i 
CC:9668  BLT:ani 


CP:nyu 

PC:r 

MMD: 

040 

100 

245 

260 

300 

LOG 

QO 


10 
10 
0 


Acquisitions     NYCG-PT 

EL: 

:       AD:08-21-91 

ATC: 

UD:08~21-91 

? 

CON: 

:??? 

? 

ILC: 

:????  MEI:?   II:? 

EML: 

:      GEN:    BSE: 

RTYP:a    ST:p   FRN:     MS 

DCF:?   CSC:?   MOD:     SNR 

L:eng     INT:?   GPC:?   BIO:?   FIC 

P0:1991/1905       REP:?   CPI:?   FSI 

OR:     POL:     DM:     RR:        cOL 

NNC}:cNNC 

Knapp,  Charles. 

Some  points  in  the  literary  study  of  VirgiUh[microform]. 
Chicago, ^bUniversity  of  Chicago, ^c[1905]. 
492-508  p. 
ORIG 
08-21-91 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 


FILM   sizE:„a€L2::r:i£>- 

IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    IA<J1A 


IID 


REDUCTION     RATIO: l\V-^ 


DATE     FILMED: Sjl^ INITIALS 

PL 


FILMED  BY:    RESEARCH  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  WOODBRIDGE,  cf 


c 


Asm>ciation  for  Information  and  Image  Managament 

1100  Wayne  Avenue.  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

12        3        4 


im 


I  n 


5        6        7        8        9       10       11       12       13      14       15   mm 

ill!  lllllllllllljlllllllll|llMjllliiiliiiilm 

2  3  4  5 


Inches 


1 


1.0 

bi      28 

if    1^ 

■tIkU 

1.4 

2.5 
22 

I.I 

2.0 

1  n 

1.25 

1.8 
1.6 

MflNUFfiCTURED  TO  OHM  STONDRRDS 
BY  fiPPLIED  IMfiGE,    INC. 


mt^im    II     If 


'   f 


Reprinted  from  The  School  Review^  Vol.  XIII,  No.  6,  June,  1905 


SOME   POINTS    IN   THE   LITERARY 

STUDY   OF  VIRGIL 


'  f'- 


fe- 


K^HW*.: 


V«." 


"^5 

.1?, 


H 


CHARLES  KNAPP 


PRINTED   AT   THI    UNIVERSITY   OF   CHICAGO    PRESS 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITER.\RY  STUDY  OF  VIRGIL' 


CHARLES  KNAPP 
Columbia  University 


In  his  preface  to  the  third  edition  of  the  third  volume  of  Con- 
ington's  Virgil  Nettleship  wrote  (1883) :  '*  Professor  Sellar's  elaborate 
study  of  Virgil  is  addressed  to  a  literar\'  rather  than  to  a  philological 
public."  This  distinction  between  the  literary  and  the  philological 
study  of  the  classics  has  been  asserted  repeatedly  since  that  time, 
in  terms,  by  editors  and  critics,  or  has  been  tacitly  taken  for  granted. 
Side  by  side  with  the  belief  in  this  distinction  another  belief  has 
taken  root,  that  the  literary  study  of  the  classics  can  be  best  advanced, 
or  at  least  materially  furthered,  by  the  inclusion  in  our  commentaries 
on  the  classic  authors  or  in  our  classroom  instruction  of  passages 
from  modem  literatures. 

I  purpose,  first  of  all,  to  protest  against  this  tendency  to  make  a 
distinction  between  the  philological  and  the  literar)'  study  of  the 
classics,  and  then  to  ask  whether  the  inclusion  in  a  printed  book 
or  in  classroom  teaching  of  quotations  from  modem  literatures, 
or  even  from  the  classic  authors  themselves,  really  makes  for  a  literary 
interpretation  and  appreciation  of  the  classics. 

WTiat  I  have  to  say  on  the  first  point  seems,  to  me  at  least,  in 
reality  of  the  nature  of  a  truism.  If  by  the  term  "philology,"  as 
applied  to  a  method  of  studying  the  works  of  a  given  Latin  poet, 
we  mean  a  minute  consideration  of  his  vocabulary,  his  grouping 
of  words,  his  syntax,  his  metrical  practices,  it  goes  without  saying 
that  the  philological  study  of  an  author  is  the  basis  of  all  study  of  an 
author.* 

As  has  been  well  said:  "Words  are  the  sole  element  of  all  literar}' 

'  Read  at  the  Classical  Conference  at  Ann  Arbor,  Mich.,  March  30,  1905. 

3  Cf.  Nettleship,  loc.  cit.i  "That  a  wider  interest  attaches  to  the  literary  than  to 
the  philological  aspect  of  the  classics  is  obvious;  yet  without  the  basis  laid  by 
philological  criticism  a  literary  appreciation,  however  good,  is  apt  to  become  vague, 
unhistorical,  and  amateurish.  I  must  plead  this  fact  as  my  justification,  if  justifica- 
tion be  needed,  for  attempting  to  advance  this  commentary  in  the  direction  of 
thoroughness  and  precision." 

492 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITERARY  STUDY  OF  VIRGIL       493 

expression;  upon  their  weight  and  color  depend  all  possible  liter- 
ary effects."  It  follows  that  no  study  of  Latin  words  can  be  too 
minute.  He  who  masters  Latin  words  most  thoroughly  will,  other 
things  being  equal,  be  the  best  qualified  to  reach  a  correct  literary 
appreciation  of  Latin  authors,  particularly  of  poets  like  Virgil  and 
Horace.* 

Words  are,  however,  not  used  singly;  they  are  combined  into 
phrases,  clauses,  and  sentences.  At  this  point  considerations  of 
syntax  and  word-order  enter.  Yet  in  some  way  many  students 
come  to  college  with  the  strange  notion  that  the  study  of  grammar 
is  utterly  incompatible  with  the  literary  study  of  the  classic  poets. 
Yet  it  is  so  obviously  true  that  one  is  ashamed  to  state  it  in  this 
company  that  without  a  knowledge  of  syntax  no  interpretation  at  all 
of  the  classics  is  possible,  whereas  the  keener  and  more  incisive, 
the  more  automatic  and  instinctive  is  one^s  interpretation  of  the  syntax 

» I  cannot  forbear  to  quote  one  example  of  the  results  still  to  be  won  by  an  intensive 
study  of  Latin  words.  In  jEneid^  VI,  298,  326,  Charon  is  called  portitor.  Amer- 
ican editions  of  Virgil  are,  I  think,  a  unit  in  defining  portitor  simply  as  "ferryman," 
"boatman,"  "carrier."  Lewis  and  Short  and  Georges  recognize  two  words  spelled 
portitor:  one  they  connect  with  portus,  citing  it  only  from  Plautus,  Terence,  and  Cicero; 
the  other  they  derive  from  porto,  citing  it  first  from  Virgil  and  Propertius.  No  attempt 
is  made  to  explain  why  the  latter  word  took  the  form  portitor  rather  than  portator. 

Now,  down  through  Cicero  in  every  passage  which  shows  a  word  portitor  the 
meaning  "port-warden,"  "custom-house  oflScer,"  is  absolutely  demanded.  Lexico- 
graphical comments  in  Donatus  on  Terence,  Tiberius  Donatus  on  Virgil,  and  Nonius 
point  the  same  way.  Nonius'  note  is  especially  clear:  "Portitores  dicuntur  teleonarii, 
qui  portum  obsidentes  omnia  sciscitantur,  ut  ex  eo  vectigal  accipiant."  A  word  por- 
titor occurs  next  in  Georgics,  IV,  502,  in  the  description  of  the  underworld.  (Virgil 
had  his  eyes  on  this  passage  while  he  was  writing  the  longer  description  of  Hades  in 
^neid,  VI.)  Orpheus  has  turned  around  to  see  if  Eurydice  is  following;  she  vanishes 
from  his  sight,  and  he  seeks  her  in  vain:  "Nee  portitor  Orci  Amplius  obiectam  passus 
transire  paludem."  Here,  certainly,  Charon  is  the  warder  of  the  river  of  the  under- 
world, an  inspector,  so  to  say,  set  to  scrutinize  all  comers  and  to  bar  out  those  who 
have  no  right  to  cross,  as  the  customs  officer  is  set  to  bar  forbidden  goods  from  passage 
through  town  or  country.  Mneid,  VI,  298,  326,  are  precisely  similar.  What  attracted 
Eneas'  attention  was  the  diflference  made  by  Charon  in  accepting  some  umbrae  for 
passage  and  rejecting  others;  cf.  319,  320  with  315,  316.  Charon's  primary  functions, 
then,  are  those  of  a  warder,  inspector;  his  functions  as  ferryman  are  secondary.  It 
was  the  misunderstanding  of  the  Virgilian  passages  and  the  placing  of  the  stress  on 
the  less  important  part  of  Charon's  functions  that  led  later  Latin  writers  and  modem 
critics  alike  to  define  portitor  here  by  "ferryman"  rather  than  by  "warder"  or  the 
like.  Georges  and  Lewis  and  Short,  then,  should  be  corrected;  there  is  but  one 
word  portitor  (cf.  portus).  See  Norden  on  Mneid,  VI,  298,  to  whose  suggestive 
discussion  this  note  owes  its  origin. 


494 


THE  SCHOOL  REVIEW 


of  a  Latin  poet,  and  the  slighter,  by  consequence,  the  barrier  between 
himself  and  the  author,  the  better  prepared  is  he  to  understand  and 
enjoy  the  Latin  poets  as  literature.  Knowledge  of  forms,  mastery 
of  syntax,  control  of  vocabulary,  are  the  tools  by  which  we  arc  to  do 
our  work  in  the  classics;  it  behooves  us,  therefore,  if  we  would  be 
skilful  and  effective  workmen,  to  make  these  tools  as  keen  and  ser- 
\'iceable  as  possible. 

In  addition  to  the  general  problems  presented  by  the  grouping 
of  words,  as  determined  by  the  great  fundamental  laws  of  the  lan- 
guage, the  laws  of  syntax,  the  student  of  a  Latin  poet  finds  himself 
confronted  by  certain  special  problems,  due  in  part  to  the  poet's 
own  temperament,  in  part  to  the  limitations  imposed  upon  him  by 
the  metrical  form.    Virgil,  for  example,  is  fond  of  phrases  which 
are  inversions  of  those  current  in  ordinary  speech  or  writing.    Here 
absolute  mastery  of  the  normal  types  of  expression  is  the  best  equip- 
ment for  the  would-be  interpreter  of  Virgil.     Stress  has  often  been 
laid  on  the  suggestiveness  of  VirgiPs  language ;  that  is  to  say,  it  has 
been  argued  that  Virgil   frequently  employs  phrases  which    shall 
suggest  to  his  readers  two  or  more  sets  of  ideas,  so  that  the  reader 
is  often  at  a  loss  to  determine  which  meaning  he  should  emphasize 
in  his  interpretation.^     If  this  view  is  not  misguided,  it  is  clear  that 
VirgiPs  language  requires  especial  study.     It  is  equally  clear,  to  me 
at  least,  that  the  practice  pf  delivering  to  the  pupil,  in  vocabulary 
or  notes,  ready-made  renderings  for  all  of  VirgiPs  phrases  is  not 
wholly  justifiable,  to  say  the  least,  since  from  such  renderings  the 
pupil  gets  but  partial  truth  after  all,  and  is  furthermore  relieved 
of  all  necessity  of  individual  thinking  and  robbed  of  the  stimulus 
to  genuine  literary  appreciation  which  would  be  the  result  of  such 
individual  thought. 

It  may  perhaps  be  objected  that  what  I  am  urging  is  too  difficult 
for  the  average  pupil.    Personal  experience  had  in  actual  teaching 

»  Cf.  especially  T.  R.  Glover,  Studies  in  Virgil,  pp.  47,  48,  and  Haigh,  The  Tragic 
Drama  of  the  Greeks,  p.  164:  "Above  aU  he  [Sophocles]  closely  resembles  Virgil  in  the 
half-veiled  allusiveness  of  his  style.  He  chooses  some  skilful  combination  of  words, 
which,  beyond  its  obvious  significance,  calls  to  mind  yet  other  combinations,  and  opens 
out  new  vistas  of  thought.  Various  fancies  and  recollections  appear  to  hover  round 
the  lines,  suggested  by  the  subUety  of  the  terms  employed;  and  the  language,  in  such 
cases,  becomes  alive  with  meaning,  like  an  atmosphere  quivering  with  diverse-coloured 
lights." 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITERARY  STUDY  OF  VIRGIL       495 

m  preparatory  schools  goes  to  disprove  this  contention.  I  am  glad 
to  find  that  my  view  here  is  shared  by  others.  Professor  Miller,  in 
the  preface  to  his  edition  of  selections  from  Ovid,  remarks  that 
"young  students  often  have  a  clearer  insight  and  a  larger  appreciation 
than  is  usually  credited  to  them."  Professor  Miller  was,  indeed, 
thinking  of  the  pupiPs  power  to  appreciate  the  thought  of  Ovid  and 
the  illustration  of  that  thought  by  modem  uses  of  the  same  materials; 
what  he  says  holds  true,  however,  I  am  convinced,  in  the  sphere  of 
word  and  phrase  analysis. 

VirgiPs  language  is  in  large  measure,  also,  even  against  his  will, 
the  result  of  another  force,  "the  shackles  of  the  meter."'  Increasing 
attention  has  lately  been  paid  in  various  editions  of  Latin  hexameter 
poets  to  the  hampering  effects  of  the  metrical  form,  and  to  the  means 
taken  by  the  poets  to  escape  its  incubus.  This  has  been  done  most 
strikingly,  perhaps,  in  Norden's  large  edition  of  jEneid  VI;'  the 
book  should  be  read  and  studied  for  this  if  for  nothing  else.  Phrase- 
ology, syntax,  word-order,  nay,  the  very  thought  itself,  were  all  alike 
affected  by  the  meter. 

On  this  matter  it  is  needless,  however,  to  dwell  further.  I  wish 
rather  to  remark  that  it  is  our  duty  to  bring  out  some  of  the  facts 
pertinent  here  to  our  students.    This  task  is  easy  of  accomplishment; 

»  Cf .  Professor  Johnston's  paper,  "  The  Teaching  of  Virgil  in  High  Schools." 
a  By  Eduard  Norden  (Leipzig,  Teubner:  1903.  For  a  review  of  the  book  see 
Classical  Review,  1904,  pp.  403-7).  This  whole  matter  has  seldom,  if  ever,  been 
better  put  than  it  was  by  Conington,  in  a  paper  on  "  Early  Roman  Tragedy  and  Epic 
Poetry,"  printed  originally  in  the  North  British  Review,  No.  LXXXII,  and  included 
laf^r  in  his  Miscellaneous  Writings,  Vol.  I,  pp.  294-347;  cf.  p.  m-  "Superficial 
observers  are  apt  to  treat  the  influence  of  metre  with  comparative  indifference,  as 
involving  the  mere  outward  form  of  poetry;  but  a  more  careful  analysis  will  show 
that  though  the  soul  of  verse  is  doubtless  originally  separable  from  its  body,  the  latter 
is  not  a  bare  husk,  to  be  assumed  or  thrown  off  at  pleasure,  but  a  part  of  an  organized 
whole,  modified  and  modifying  in  turn,  and  clinging  to  its  partner  with  a  tenacious 
vitality,  which  criticism,  in  attempting  to  disentangle,  is  apt  to  destroy.  The  language 
reacts  on  the  thought,  which,  in  taking  shape,  is  obliged  to  part  with  something  of  its 
own,  and  accept  something  extraneous  and  accidental;  and  the  metre  exerdses  a 
similar  constraint  on  the  language,  enforcing  the  substitution  of  one  word  for  another, 
and  thus  producing  a  still  further  departure  from  the  precise  character  of  the  conception 
orginally  formed  by  the  mind.  This  second  bondage  makes  itself  felt  much  more  in 
ancient  than  in  modem  metres,  in  proportion  as  the  rule  of  quantity  is  more  search- 
ingly  oppressive  than  the  rule  of  accent."  See  also  Myers,  Essays,  Classical,  pp. 
135-39- 


496 


THE  SCHOOL  REVIEW 


if  we  discharge  it  well,  we  shall  inevitably  deepen  the  respect  and 
admiration  of  our  pupils  for  Virgil,  by  giving  them  some  conception 
of    the   difficulties   which   Virgil   met   and   overcame.     Further,   a 
teacher  might  compare  some  of  the  best  as  well  as  some  of  the  worst 
verses  in  Ennius  with  good  and  bad  verses  in  the  Mneid,  and  thereby 
make  even  the  dullest  of  his  pupils  reaHze  the  gap  between  the  hexam- 
eters that  mark  the  beginnings  and  those  that  mark  the  culmination 
of  that  type  of  poetic  form  among  the  Romans.    He  might  compare 
verses  of  Catullus  and  Lucretius,  too,  with  verses  of  Virgil,  to  show 
what  advances  Virgil  made  over  his  immediate  predecessors;   and 
lastly,  by  setting  VirgiPs  verses  side  by  side  with  those  of  Lucan, 
Ovid,  or  even  Juvenal,  he  might  show  how  incapable  anyone  else  was, 
even  with  Virgil  before  him  as  a  model,  to  duplicate  VirgiPs  achieve- 
ment.'    All  this  is  in  reality  comparatively  simple  work,  not  involving 
understanding  of  the  subject-matter  of  the  authors  referred  to,  and 
likely  to  stimulate  understanding  and  appreciation  of  metrical  form. 
Further,  as  hinted  above,  this  study  of  the  metrical  form  of  the  ^neid 
will  lead  to  juster  apprehension  and  appreciation  of  Virgil  himself. 
It  is  true  that  he  loved,  for  its  own  sake,  intricate  and  unusual  turns 
of  expression;  it  is  also  true  that  much  that  strikes  one,  at  least  at 
first,  as  disagreeable  in  the  language  of  Virgil  was  forced  on  him 
by  conditions  which,  with  all  his  marvelous  skill,  he  was  not  able  to 
overcome  entirely.    To  make  a  pupil  realize,  first,  how  ill-adapted 
the  Latin  language  was,  naturally  to  the  hexameter,  to  give  him  some 
conception  of  the  history  of  this  form  of  verse  among  the  Romans, 
to  make  him  realize,  even  if  but  faintly,  how  much  Virgil  achieved 
in  his  hexameters,  must  waken  in  him  admiration  for  VirgiPs  powers 
as  a  poet. 

For  my  own  part,  therefore,  I  decHne  to  think  of  a  literary  study 
of  the  Roman  poets  apart  from  a  philological  study  of  them.  Nay, 
I  beheve  rather  that  it  is  just  because  our  students  are  so  lamentabiy 
weak  on  the  philological  side  that  they  do  not  appreciate,  as  they 
might,  Latin  poetry.  Our  students  come  to  the  study  of  Virgil 
and  Horace  with  but  imperfect  knowledge  of  the  normal  forms  of 
inflection;  they  have  a  still  more  halting  knowledge  of  Latin  syntax. 

« I  may  refer  here  to  the  edition  of  Lucan  by  Messrs.  Haskins  and  Heitland, 
pp.  xciv-c,  especially  p.  xcvi. 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITERARY  STUDY  OF  VIRGIL       497 

Their  control  of  vocabulary  is  largely,  if  not  wholly,  conspicuous 
by  its  absence.  So  long  as  such  conditions  obtain,  so  long  will  it  be 
necessar)'  to  carry  into  our  teaching  of  the  poets  elementary  drill 
in  vocabulary,  forms,  and  syntax.  But,  even  if  our  students  were 
thoroughly  drilled  in  the  normal  in  forms  and  syntax,  much  hard  work 
in  such  matters  philological  would  yet  be  necessary.  The  poets, 
especially  Virgil,  present  to  the  student  forms  he  has  not  met  before ; 
the  departures  from  the  norms  of  syntax  are  even  more  striking.' 

I  must  now  say  certain  things  to  prevent  misunderstanding  of 
my  position  as  suggested  above.  The  study  of  which  I  have  spoken 
at  such  length  is  not  to  be  pursued  for  its  own  sake  merely,  but  rather 
as  a  means  to  an  end ;  that  end  is  the  understanding  and  appreciation 
and  enjoyment  of  the  Mneid  as  a  whole.  The  difficulty  with  the 
"philological"  study  of  the  classics  is  that  it  tends  to  regard  such 
study  as  an  end  in  itself.  There  is  a  real,  but  not  an  inevitable 
or  insuperable  danger  here.  The  mastery  of  the  details  discussed 
above  is  essential  to  an  understanding  of  the  poem;  as  has  already 
been  said,  the  better  one's  knowledge  of  such  things  is,  the  better 
is  he  equipped  to  appreciate,  if  only  he  will  press  on  to  such  appre- 
ciation. 

What  should  our  pupils  carry  with  them  into  college  from  their 
study  of  the  jEneid  ?  First,  a  knowledge  of  the  details  of  vocabu- 
lary, form,  syntax,  meter,  on  which  I  have  dwelt  so  long,  perhaps 
too  long,  already.  Secondly,  a  knowledge  of  the  contents  of  the 
poem,  or  at  least  of  such  portions  of  it  as  they  have  read.  It  is 
astonishing  how  many  college  students  possess  Httle  or  no  faculty 
of  recalling,  in  any  connected  way,  the  subject-matter  of  the  Greek 
or  Latin  authors  that  are  within  their  reading.     Lack  of  practice 

»  Cf.  Conington,  Miscellaneous  Writings^  Vol.  I,  p.  220:  "The  way  to  study 
Latin  liteiature  is  to  study  the  authors  who  gave  it  its  characters:  the  way  to  study 
those  authors  is  to  study  them  individually  in  their  individual  works,  and  to  study 
each  work,  as  far  as  may  be,  in  its  minutest  details.  For  other  purposes,  we  may 
be  satisfied  with  a  general  view  of  an  author's  mind,  or  with  a  cursory  jjerusal 
of  some  one  or  more  of  his  writings;  but  the  peculiar  training  which  is  sought 
from  the  study  of  hterature  is  only  to  be  obtained,  in  anything  like  its  true  fulness, 
by  attending,  not  merely  to  each  paragraph  or  each  sentence,  but  to  each  word; 
not  merely  to  the  general  force  of  an  expression,  but  to  the  various  constituents  which 
make  up  the  effect  produced  by  it  on  a  thoroughly  intelligent  reader."  Conington 
had  the  scholar  in  mind,  but,  when  proper  deductions  shall  have  been  made,  his  remarks 
will  apply  to  all  students  of  the  classics. 


498 


THE  SCHOOL  REVIEW 


in  such  work  is,  probably,  largely  the  cause  of  the  lack  of  power 
to  do  it.  As  a  detail  of  this  knowledge  of  the  contents  of  iht  Mneid, 
they  should  have  a  comprehension  of  the  great  parts  into  which 
it  falls,  and  of  their  relation  to  one  another. 

Thirdly,  our  students  should  carry  with  them  a  knowledge  of 
the  real  purpose  of  the  Mneid  and  of  the  way  in  which  that  purpose 
is  achieved.  What  relation  do  various  parts  of  the  work  bear  to 
the  underlying  theme  ?  Whence  came  the  story  of  ^Eneas  ?  When 
and  how  did  the  Romans  come  to  beheve  in  this  story  ?  W^hy  did 
Virgil  give  to  this  story  a  prominence  denied  to  it  by  Ennius  ?  Or, 
in  other  words,  why  did  Virgil  select  it  as  the  means  by  which  to 
achieve  his  underlying  purpose?  In  this  connection  the  teacher 
has  an  admirable  opportunity  to  draw  for  all  time  for  his  pupils 
the  distinction  between  mere  translation  and  real  interpretation — 
a  distinction  so  vital  to  the  apprehension  and  appreciation  of  poetry. 

Fourthly,  I  am  inclined  to  beHeve  that  something  can  be  done 
also  to  make  our  pupils  gain  some  appreciation  of  the  sources  of 
the  Mneid  and  of  the  methods  by  which  Virgil  made  use  of  his 
materials.     I  am  aware  that  many  students'  total  unacquaintance 
with  Greek,  and  all  students*  imperfect  mastery  of  Latin  and  their 
necessarily  limited  outlook  upon    the  field  of   classical  literature 
present  great  difficulties  here;  but  something  at  least  can  be  done. 
To  take  but  one  case :     There  is  possibility  of  showing  to  intelligent 
pupils  the  skill  with  which  Virgil  has  worked  out  the  Pahnurus 
episode  in  Book  VI;    how  he  has  utiHzed  materials  got  from  one 
passage  in  the  Iliad  and  two  passages  in  the  Odyssey,  combined 
with  matter  obtained  from  local  traditions  current  both  in  Etruria 
and  Lucania,  and  yet  has  put  the  whole  together  so  skilfully  that 
the  ordinary  reader  does  not  detect  the  sutures,  beside  producing 
a  passage  which,  though  Hke  in  details  to  various  other  things,  is 
itself  in  reaHty  a  new  creation.    Work  of  this  sort  will  go  far  to 
prevent,  or  at  least  to  correct,  erroneous  ideas  on  the  student 's  part, 
by  throwing  important  light  on  the  question  of  Virgil's  originality; 
for  it  will  help  him,  first  of  all,  to  understand  aright  the  attitude 
of  the  Roman  literary  world  to  the  whole  question  of  the  use  of  the 
materials  gathered  by  Hterary  predecessors;    and,  secondly,  it  will 
show  how  independent,  after  all,  is   the  VirgiUan  product,  even 


ll 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITERARY  STUDY  OF  VIRGIL       499 

when  the  materials  are  wholly  or  almost  entirely  borrowed  from 
earlier  works. 

It  may  be  objected  that  I  am  utterly  impractical  and  visionary 
in  my  presentation  of  the  aims  which  teachers  and  students  should 
set  before  themselves.  So  far,  however,  as  the  teacher  is  concerned, 
I  am  certainly  not  demanding  too  much.  Indeed,  I  fail  to  see 
how  the  teacher  who  desires  to  make  the  most  of  himself  can,  in 
bare  justice  to  himself,  be  content  with  less  than  I  have  suggested. 
So  far  as  the  teaching  of  our  pupils  is  concerned,  I  might  reply  simply 
in  terms  of  the  platitude  that,  since  we  inevitably  come  far  short 
of  our  ideals,  it  makes  for  respectable  achievement  to  set  those  ideals 
as  high  as  possible.  I  shall  rather  say,  however,  that  experience 
shows  that  much  of  this  work  can  be  done.  Again,  the  adoption  of 
the  point  of  view  I  have  suggested  will  do  something  to  correct  what 
seems  to  me  a  lamentable  tendency  in  educational  matters,  at  least 
in  matters  Latin.  I  refer  to  the  tendency  to  take  every  possible 
precaution  that  the  student  shall  never  have  to  do  a  hard  or  disagree- 
able thing  in  all  his  study  of  the  classics,  to  smooth  the  road  before 
his  feet,  and  to  shield  him  from  every  blustering  wind.  It  is  curious 
that,  side  by  side  with  the  increasing  attention  paid  to  physical 
training,  there  should  be  this  tendency  to  forget  that  intellectual 
powers,  too,  may  be  weakened  by  disuse,  just  as  they  are  strength- 
ened by  use,  and  that  intellectual  coddling  and  pampering  will  not 
produce  vigorous  and  virile  mentality. 

So  far  I  have  spoken  of  things  which,  it  seems  to  me,  are  vital  in 
the  literary  study  of  Latin  poetry.  I  pass  now  to  consider  whether 
the  presentation  in  textbook  or  classroom  of  passages  from  modem 
literatures  ("parallel  passages,"  so  called)  contributes  to  the  literary 
appreciation  of  the  classics. 

I  will  not  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  it  does  not  help  at  all,  but  I  do 
assert  vigorously  that  its  value  is  commonly  vastly  overrated.  My 
general  position  is  this:  No  "parallel  passage"  or  cross-reference  is 
of  real,  definite  value  to  a  student  unless  the  passage  which  is  to  be 
used  as  illustrative  material  is  itself  reasonably  familiar  to  him,  so 
much  so  that  he  can  at  once  picture  to  himself  the  setting  in  which 
it  occurs,  and  can  at  once  recall  definitely  and  clearly  its  exact  meaning. 

Let  us  take  a  concrete  example,  from  the  sphere  of  syntax.     In 


Soo 


THE  SCHOOL  REVIEW 


jEneid,  I,  4,  the  pupil  meets  a  strange  form,  superum.     Obviously  he 
cannot  interpret  this  verse  until  he  knows  the  exact  nature  of  this 
form.    Is  it  wise,  then,  to  ask  the  pupil  to  compare  this  passage  with 
half  a  dozen  others  in  later  books,  each  of  which  he  is  equally  unable 
to  interpret  until  he  understands  this  form  of  the  genitive. plural,  and 
to  require  him  to  induce  from  them  a  rule  which  he  shall  apply  to 
the  interpretation  of  the  passage  with  which  he  is  primarily  concerned  ? 
Is  this  to  help  a  pupil  ?    This,  you  may  say,  is  an  extreme  case. 
Yet,  repeatedly  in  our  editions  of  classic  authors  the  notes  are  packed 
with  references  to  classical  passages  which  the  pupil  has  never  read 
and  is  never  likely  to  read.     Often  such  "parallels"  are  the  only 
help  given.     Of  what  value  will  such  passages  be  ?    We  have  already 
confessed   that  our  student  comes  to  the  study  of  poetry  but  ill 
equipped;  yet  we  virtually  ask  him,  as  he  is  laboring  to  understand 
a  given  text,  to  add  to  the  burdens  which  that  task  is  imposing  upon 
him  by  reading  all  sorts  of  bits  in  all  sorts  of  styles,  though  he  has 
not  the  faintest  conception  of  the  setting  of  these  passages.    Is  it  any 
wonder  that  our  students  cultivate  the  habit  of  skipping  all  the  parallel 
passages  cited  in  their  notes  ? 

It  may  be  said  that  the  case  is  different  with  citations  from  English 
authors.  This  I  deny.  Is  all  EngUsh  poetry  absolutely  transparent, 
so  that  isolated  bits  of  the  poets,  dislocated  entirely  from  their  context, 
will  speak  instantaneously  in  the  same  tones  and  terms,  to  all  minds  ? 
The  teachers  of  English  do  not  think  so,  if  one  may  judge  from  the 
annotations  in  their  editions  of  the  English  classics.  Are  our  students 
in  the  preparatory  schools,  or  even  those  in  the  colleges,  well  versed 
in  knowledge  of  English  Uterature?  Test  the  matter  by  citing 
passages  from  the  better-known  poets,  and  note  how  few  faces  will 
light  up  with  recollection  of  the  contents  or  language  of  the  passage 
adduced  as  a  parallel.  I  repeat  that  to  be  truly  illustrative  a  passage 
must  have  body  and  content  by  which  to  appeal  to  the  pupiPs  mem- 
ory and  imagination.' 

'  It  is  the  fashion  among  opponents  of  classical  education  to  argue  that  the  Ume 
now  spent  in  the  study  of  Greek  and  LaUn  could  be  used  to  better  advantage  in  the 
study  of  other  things,  especially  of  EngUsh.  Until  I  see  more  signs  than  I  have  here- 
tofore noted  that  the  teaching  of  EngUsh  has  thus  far  been  markedly  successful,  either 
in  enabUng  the  pupil  to  write  EngUsh  weU  or  in  enlarging  his  knowledge  of  EngUsh 
literature,  especially  poetry,  I  shaU  combat  this  contention  with  might  and  main. 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITERARY  STUDY  OF  VIRGIL       501 

I  have  other  difficulties  in  this  connection.  It  takes  space  in 
the  printed  book,  it  takes  time  in  the  classroom,  to  bring  these  par- 
allels before  our  pupils.  Necessarily  something  must  be  sacrificed 
to  find  time  or  space  for  them;  that  something  will  inevitably  be 
the  very  things  on  which  I  have  laid  such  stress  above  as  being 
indispensable. 

Again,  to  rely  much  on  modem  parallels  in  editing  or  teaching 
the  Mneid  or  any  other  ancient  work,  is  to  proceed  in  unscientific 
fashion,  by  encouraging  the  pupil  in  the  habit  to  which  he  is  naturally 
only  too  prone,  that  of  getting  at  the  meaning  and  spirit  of  his  original 
through  a  translation  or  parallel  in  some  other  language,  rather  than 
through  contact  with  the  original  itself. 

But  I  have  another  and,  to  me,  far  more  serious  difficulty,  in  the 
fact  that  in  countless  instances  the  supposed  parallel  from  modem 
literature  is  not  a  parallel  at  all,  because  it  differs  fundamentally 
in  spirit  from  the  Latin  or  Greek  passage  it  is  supposed  to  illustrate, 
so  much  so  that  such  a  supposed  parallel,  instead  of  helping  a  student 
to  understand  his  original,  may  in  reality  interpose  a  grievous  obstacle 
between  him  and  his  apprehension  and  appreciation  of  the  original. 

Let  me  put  my  point  in  an  extreme  illustration.  Suppose  we  had 
an  edition  of  Homer  which  should  consist  wholly  of  illustrative 
parallels  from  ApoUonius  Rhodius  and  VirgD;  would  that  edition 
give  a  proper  interpretation  of  Homer  ?  Surely  not,  even  if  the  one 
purpose  of  ApoUonius  and  of  Virgil  had  been  to  reproduce  Homer 
with  the  utmost  faithfulness.  How  much  less  true  would  the  inter- 
pretation thus  gained  be  In  view  of  the  fact  that  both  ApoUonius 
and  Virgil  sought,  as  it  has  been  maintained,  to  imitate  Homer, 
yes,  but  as  rivals,  seeking  to  suggest  to  their  contemporaries  contrast 
rather  than  comparison  with  the  father  of  Greek  poetry !'  In  many 
instances  modem  passages  are  equally  misleading.  Even  the  best 
translation  fails  to  reproduce  exactly  or  fully  the  original;  much 
more  will  paraphrase  and  hazy  or  mistaken  reminiscence  and  imita- 
tion come  short  of  such  reproduction. 

Let  us  take  an  example.  In  Mneid,  I,  159-69,  there  is  a  descrip- 
tion of  a.  harbor,  as  follows. 

'  For  Virgil  of.  Conington's  edition,  Vol.  II,  p.  xliv.  For  ApoUonius  Rhodius 
see  Professor  Robinson  ElUs,  cited  in  Mr.  Way's  translation  of  Ap)ollonius  ("Temple 
Classics"),  p.  208. 


502 


THE  SCHOOL  REVIEW 


Est  in  secessu  longo  locus  :  insula  portum 
efl&cit  obiectu  laterum,  quibus  omnis  ab  alto 
frangitur  inque  sinus  scindit  sese  unda  reductos. 
Hinc  atque  hinc  vastae  rupes  geminique  minantur 
in  caelum  scopuli  quorum  sub  vertice  late 
aequora  tuta  silent;   turn  silvis  scaena  coruscis 
desuper  horrentique  atrum  nemus  imminet  umbra. 
Fronte  sub  adversa  scopulis  pendentibus  antrum, 
intus  aquae  dulces  vivoque  sedilia  saxo, 
nymphanim  domus.    Hie  fessas  non  vincula  navis 
ulla  tenent,  unco  non  alligat  ancora  morsu. 

No  one  of  us  need  feel  ashamed  to  admit  that  this  passage  gives 
him  difficulty  still,  no  matter  how  many  times  he  has  read  and  pon- 
dered it  and  the  notes  in  all  the  editions  he  has  at  hand.  Yet  let 
us  suppose  that  teacher  or  editor  says  little  or  nothing  concerning 
the  meaning  of  secessu,  159  (and  the  way  in  which  the  word  gets 
that  meaning),  or  of  sinus  ....  reductos,  161,  or  of  silvis  scaena 
coruscis,  164,  or  of  horrenti  ....  umbra,  165,  or  of  scopulis  pen- 
deniihus,  166:  let  us  suppose  that  he  contents  himself  with  citing 
passages  like  the  following: 

A  port  there  is  in  Ithaca,  the  haunt 

Of  Phorcys,  Ancient  of  the  Sea.    Steep  shores 

Stretch  inward  toward  each  other,  and  roll  back       . 

The  mighty  surges  which  the  hoarse  winds  hurl 

Against  them  from  the  ocean,  while  within 

Ships  ride  without  their  hawsers,  when  they  once 

Have  passed  the  haven's  mouth.    An  olive  tree 

With  spreading  branches  at  the  farther  end 

Of  that  fair  haven  stands,  and  overbrows 

A  pleasant  shady  grotto  of  the  Nymphs. 

— Odyssey,  XIIT,  117-26. 
And  overhead  grew 

Insuperable  height  of  loftiest  shade, 

Cedar,  and  pine,  and  fir,  and  branching  palm, 

A  sylvan  scene,  and,  as  the  ranks  ascend 

Shade  above  shade,  a  woody  theatre 

Of  stateliest  view. 

— Paradise  Lost.  IV,  137-44. 
Far  to  the  right,  where  Apennine  ascends, 
Bright  as  the  summer,  Italy  extends: 
Its  uplands  sloping  deck  the  mountain's  side, 
Woods  over  woods  in  gay  theatric  pride. 

— Goldsmith,  Traveller,  105-8. 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITERARY  STUDY  OF  VIRGIL       503 

Does  any  one  of  these  three  passages  come  within  measurable  dis- 
tance even  of  VirgiPs  picture?  Does  this  passage  from  Spenser* 
give,  as  has  been  asserted,  "substantially  the  same  picture"  as  that 
portrayed  by  Virgil  ? 

And  now  they  nigh  approched  to  the  sted 

Whereas  those  Mermayds  dwelt.    It  was  a  still 

And  calmy  bay,  on  the  one  side  sheltered 

With  the  brode  shadow  of  an  hoarie  hill; 

On  th'  other  side  an  high  rocke  toured  still. 

That  twixt  them  both  a  pleasaimt  port  they  made. 

And  did  like  an  half  theatre  fulfill. 

Does  even  the  following  passage,  closely  as  it  follows  Virgil  in  its 
general  outlines,  give  an  exact  reproduction  of  its  original  ? 

In  one  they  find  a  lone  sequestered  place 

Where,  to  a  crescent  curved,  the  shore  extends 

Two  moony  horns,  that  in  their  sweep  embrace 

A  spacious  bay — a  rock  the  port  defends; 

Inward  it  fronts,  and  broad  to  ocean  bends 

Its  back,  whereon  each  dashing  billow  dies, 

When  the  wind  rises  and  the  storm  descends; 

While  here  and  there  two  lofty  crags  arise. 

Whose  towers,  far  out  at  sea,  salute  the  sailor's  eyes. 

Safe  sleep  the  silent  seas  beneath;  above. 

Black  arching  woods  o'ershade  the  circled  scene: 

Within  a  grotto  opens  in  the  grove, 

Pleasant  with  flowers,  with  moss,  with  ivies  green, 

And  waters  warbling  in  the  depths  unseen; 

Needed  nor  twisted  rof)e  nor  anchor  there 

For  weary  ships;   into  that  so  serene 

And  sheltered  hermitage,  the  maiden  fair 

Entered,  her  slender  sails  unfurling  from  the  air. 

— Tasso,  Ger.  Lib.,  XV,  42,  43. 

Of  these  passages  not  one  is  an  exact  counterpart  of  the  Virgilian 
passage  which  it  is  the  prime  business  of  the  student  at  the  moment 
to  understand.  Some,  indeed,  introduce  conceptions  quite  foreign 
to  the  picture  drawn  by  Virgil.  Will  such  passages  enable  the  stu- 
dent to  reach  a  clear  apprehension  and  a  right  enjoyment  of  the 
Vergilian  passage  ?  Will  they  not  rather  confuse  him  and  add  to 
the  difficulties  of  his  task,  already  severe  enough  ?    Do  such  passages 

^Fairie  Queene,  II,  12,  30. 


504 


THE  SCHOOL  REVIEW 


illustrate  (i.  e.,  illuminate)  Virgil,  or  do  they  simply  decorate  the 
commentary  ? 

Certain  things  written  five  years  ago  by  Professor  Postgate,  the 
distinguished  English  scholar,  set  forth  so  admirably  what  I  have 
been  trying  to  say  that  I  cannot  refrain  from  quoting  them  here:' 

And  here  I  must  pause  to  touch  upon  a  very  subtle  danger  which  the  free  use 
of  modem  parallels  involves.  A  quotation  from  a  modem  writer  brings  home 
to  the  reader's  mind  the  thought  which  the  citer  desires  to  suggest  with  a  force 
and  vividness  that  no  ancient  quotation  can  match.  Such  an  appeal  is  apt  to 
sweep  reason  from  her  feet,  while  the  mind  forgets  that  the  modem  may  have 
misunderstood  or  misrepresented  the  ancient  and  that  at  any  rate  he  is  a  modern 
after  all. 

Professor  Postgate  then  reminds  us,  by  way  of  illustration,  that 
though  Jugurtha,  when  thrust  into  the  Career  TuUianum,  exclaimed, 
"Jove,  how  cold  your  bath  is,"^  Longfellow,  in  a  poem  on  Jugurtha, 
makes  the  exclamation  run,  "How  cold  are  thy  baths,  Apollo!'' 
Professor  Postgate  then  proceeds: 

If  the  poetic  mind  works  so  freely  with  a  plain  narrative  of  fact,  how  watchful 
must  we  be  of  comparisons  which  suggest  that  it  will  render  faithfully  an  ancient 
conception  from  the  nebulous  regions  of  sentiment  and  fancy?  Few  poets 
have  had  a  finer  knowledge  of  the  ancient  poets  than  Tennyson.  He  sings  of 
an  "island-valley"  with  **bower}^  hollows  crowned  with  summer  seas,"  just  as 
Homer  had  sung  of  an  island,  t^v  T^pi  irdvTos  direlpiTos  4<rr€(fMivu)Tai..3  The 
resemblance  is  obvious:  and  the  difference.  We  may  hope  that,  if  Tennyson 
had  been  translating  the  Odyssey ^  he  would  have  avoided  a  word  which  carries 
an  idea  of  "surmounting"  absent  from  the  Homeric  verb.-* 

In  writing  these  words.  Professor  Postgate  had  in  mind,  not  young 
pupils,  but  scholars,  men  presumably  well  versed  in  the  ancient  and 
the  modern  classic^,  capable  of  interpreting  each  by  themselves,  and 
of  comparing  or  contrasting  them  in  such  wise  as  to  apprehend  their 
fundamental  and  inner  agreement  or  disagreement  of  thought  and 
spirit.  The  danger  to  which  he  refers  undeniably  exists  for  the 
scholar;  how  much  more  docs  it  exist  for  the  young  pupil  who  has 
no  firm  grasp  as  yet  on  either  the  ancient  or  the  modern  literatures ! 

*  See  the  Classical  Review^  Vol.  XIV,  pp.  230,  231. 

a  So  Professor  Postgate,  though  he  cites  Plutarch,  MariuSy  12,  as  giving  'HpdicXets, 
cTtci',  ws  \l/vxpi>v  if/MUfv  rb  Pakavetovl 

3  We  may  render,  **  round  which  a  limitless  sea  is  set  garland-wise." 

4  Yet  Butcher  and  Lang  translate,  "  I  saw  the  island  crowned  about  with  the 
circle  of  the  endless  sea." 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITERARY  STUDY  OF   VIRGIL       505 


This  whole  matter  may  be  illustrated  equally  well  within  the 
sphere* of  the  classics  themselves.  Many  of  the  passages  cited  from 
other  authors  to  illustrate,  let  us  say  Horace  or  Virgil,  are  in  reality 
in  no  sense  strictly  applicable.  Later  poets  at  times  reproduce  their 
words  with  much  fidehty;  yet  these  reproduced  words  often  appear 
in  radically  different  settings  and  are  employed  by  the  later  poet 
with  a  widely  different  intention.  I  shall  have  time  to  consider  but 
two  examples. 

In  Cartninay  iii,  30,  1-2,  Horace  says: 

Exegi  monumentum  aere  perennius 
regalique  situ  pyramidum  altius,  etc. 

Now,  manifestly  Horace's  thought  is  that  of  the  durability  of  the 
monumentum  he  has  erected;  he  must  mean  to  say:  "I  have  reared 
a  monument  more  lasting  even  than  the  things  that  to  the  world  are 
types  of  indestructibiUty."  In  two  passages  Martial  has  more  or  less 
consciously  in  mind  these  words  of  Horace  (though  his  recollection 
of  them  is  deeply  affected  by  his  remembrance  of  Ovid's  imitation 
of  them  in  Met.,  XV,  871  ff.).    In  VIII,  3,  5-8,  Martial  cries: 

Et  cum  rupta  situ  Messalae  saxa  iacebunt 
altaque  cum  Licini  marmora  pulvis  erunt, 

me  tamen  ora  legent  et  secum  plurimus  hospes 
ad  patrias  sedes  carmina  nostra  feret. 

In  X,  2,  9-12,  Martial  says: 

Marmora  Messalae  findit  caprificus  et  audax 

dimidios  Crispi  mulio  ridet  equos: 
at  chartis  nee  furta  nocent  et  saecula  prosunt, 

solaque  non  norunt  haec  monumenta  mori. 

Both  poets  are  expressing  essentially  the  same  idea;  they  are  using 

different  means,  however,  to  express  it.    Yet  more  than  one  modern 

editor  has  asserted  that  Martial,  VIII,  3,  5,  of  itself  shows  that  situ 

in  Horace  means  "decomposition,"  "decay,"  or  the  like.^ 

In  Mneid,  VI,  426,  Virgil  begins  his  description  of  the  neutral 

region  that  lies  between  Acheron  and  Elysium-Tartarus.    He  says: 

Continuo  auditae  voces  vagitus  et  ingens 

infantumque  animae  flentes  in  limine  primo 

quos  dulcis  vitae  exsortis  et  ab  ubere  raptos  • 

abstulit  atra  dies  et  funere  mersit  acerbo. 

»  So,  e.g..  Professor  Smith  renders  regali  situ  pyramidum  by  "the  crumbling 
magnificence  of  kings." 


5o6 


THE  SCHOOL  REVIEW 


SOME  POINTS  IN  THE  LITERARY  STUDY  OF  VIRGIL       507 


^h 


For  centuries  critics  have  differed  concerning  the  interpretation  of 
in  limine  primo  in  vs.  427.  Norden,  following  La  Cerda,  argues 
that  a  passage  in  Lucan  (II,  106  ff.)  is  proof  positive  that  we  must 
join  this  phrase  with  what  follows.  Let  us  look  for  a  moment  at  what 
Lucan  really  says.  From  vs.  98  he  has  been  describing  the  excesses 
committed  by  Marius.  High  and  low,  says  Lucan,  have  perished 
at  his  hands,  slain  even  in  temples. 

Nulli  sua  profuit  aetas. 
Non  senis  extremum  piguit  vergentibus  annis 
praecipitasse  diem  nee  primo  in  limine  vitae 
infantis  miseri  nascentia  rumpere  fata. 

(None  found  profit  in  his  years.  Though  one  was  old,  at  his  life's  end, 
though  his  years  were  speeding  to  the  grave,,  Marius  felt  no  remorse  in  bringing 
them  to  a  yet  speedier  end,  nor  did  he  shrink  from  breaking  the  hapless  infant's 
thread  of  destiny  at  its  very  birth.) 

Does  this  passage  prove  how  we  must  interpret  Virgil  ?  Nay,  does 
it  throw  any  light  at  all  on  VirgiPs  language?  Is  there,  indeed, 
anything  here  that  naturally  leads  one  to  connect  this  passage  at  all 
with  Virgil  ?  Or,  assuming  that  there  is,  is  the  connection  between 
Lucan  and  Virgil  close  enough  to  warrant  one  in  overlooking  the 
fact  that  to  join  in  limine  primo  with  what  follows  is  to  do  violence 
to  word-order  and  rhythm,  and  to  introduce  an  instance  of  the  over- 
loading of  the  relative  quos  in  a  manner  which  would  be,  I  think, 
without  a  parallel  in  Virgil  ?' 

So  far  my  attitude  toward  the  use  of  so-called  parallels,  especially 
from  modern  literatures,  has  been  in  the  main  a  negative  attitude. 
It  goes  without  saying,  however,  that  I  believe  that  there  is  a  use, 
as  well  as  an  abuse,  of  such  parallels.    The  first  business  of  editor 

»  Though  I  am  not  primarily  concerned  with  the  interpretation  per  se  of  this 
passage,  I  add  one  remark  here:  if  we  join  in  primo  limine  to  what  precedes,  we  make 
Virgil  take  pains  here,  as  he  does  in  so  many  other  places  in  Book  VI,  to  mark  the 
passage  of  time  and  ^Eneas'  progress  through  the  underworld  (cf.  e.  g.,  273,  477,  540; 
2S5»  S3S-S39»  898).  Norden's  view,  that  vU(b  is  to  be  taken  dxh  koipoO  with  in 
limine  prima  and  exsortis  is  harsh,  and  does  great  violence  to  the  order  of  words. 
Even  passages  like  those  cited  by  Norden  from  Buecheler's  Carmina  Epigraphica 
(e.  g.,  rapuit  quam  mors  in  limine  vUae,  567, 4,  vUaeque  e  limine  raptus,  569,  3)  are  to  me 
not  decisive  for  Norden's  view.  Are  these  not  merely  interpretations  of  Virgil,  assum- 
ing that  they  are  due  to  his  verses  here?  As  interpretations  are  they  per  se  more 
valuable  than  the  interpretations  of  editor  or  critic  ?  Can  they  outweigh  all  consid- 
erations of  word-order,  syntax,  and  style  ? 


or  teacher  is  to  give  to  his  readers  or  pupils  the  means  of  under- 
standing the  work  which  is  actually  before  them,  and  of  understand- 
ing it  in  its  original  dress.  Everything  which  will  minister  to  this 
end  may  be  legitimately  employed.  Among  the  things  perfectly  in 
order  are  appeals  to  the  pupiPs  own  knowledge.  The  best  commen- 
tary on  Virgil  or  Horace  is  Virgil  or  Horace  himself;  hence  it  is  wise 
to  encourage  the  student  to  illustrate  the  passage  he  is  reading  today 
by  an  appeal  to  passages  he  read  yesterday,  the  day  before,  last  week, 
last  month.  It  is  fair  to  expect— nay,  to  demand — that  the  pupil 
shall  carry  along  with  him  a  reasonable  amount  of  knowledge  of  the 
portions  of  Virgil  already  studied.  We  cannot  exert  ourselves  too 
much  to  develop  in  our  students  the  power  of  understanding  what 
they  read  and  of  carrying  along  with  them  into  all  their  future  work 
a  knowledge,  not  only  of  the  contents  of  the  books  they  have  already 
studied,  but  also  of  the  means  by  which  those  contents  found  expres- 
sion. Hence,  it  is  impossible  for  the  teacher  of  the  Mneid  to  accumu- 
late too  many  references  to  passages  which  the  pupil  has  already 
seen  and  read,  and  to  some  extent  at  least  understood  and  appro- 
priated to  himself  as  part  of  his  permanent  intellectual  equipment. 
A  pupil  of  the  right  sort,  if  he  uses  but  a  small  part  of  such  references, 
will  insensibly  but  surely  add  greatly  to  his  store  of  information,  will 
deepen  and  strengthen  his  understanding  and  his  appreciation  of 
what  he  is  reading,  and  will  be  gaining,  along  the  line  of  least  resist- 
ance, a  knowledge  of  scientific  methods  of  studying  literature, 
ancient  or  modern.  ' 

First,  then,  we  should  use  parallels,  real  parallels,  from  the  classic 
authors;  pedagogical  considerations  demand  that  these  shall  be  from 
the  circle  of  the  pupiPs  own  reading,  or  at  least  shall  be  passages 
which  are  in  themselves,  divested  of  their  setting,  intelligible.  Simi- 
lar principles  will  apply— though  not  so  rigorously,  of  course — to 
the  parallels  adduced  from  modern  literatures.  Every  care  should 
be  taken  to  make  the  passages  adduced  really  parallel.  Otherwise 
such  citations  are  in  the  nature  of  decoration  rather  than  of  illus- 
tration. 

Lastly,  a  clear  general  presentation  of  the  extent  to  which  an 
author  like  Virgil,  Horace,  or  Ovid  has  influenced  modem  literature 
is,  to  my  mind,  far  better  for  the  pupil  than  the  perusal  of  a  long 


Ill 


508 


THE  SCHOOL  REVIEW 


array  of  bits  from  a  multitude  of  authors  of  various  periods.  To 
take  the  first  example  that  occurs  to  me:  A  boy  would  get  a  far 
bettec  idea  of  the  part  Horace  once  played  in  the  thinking  of  cultured 
Englishmen  from  reading  the  tenth  chapter  of  Roderick  Random, 
with  proper  comments  by  his  teacher,  or  by  noting  the  r61e  that 
Horace  plays,  in  direct  quotation  and  indirect  paraphrase  and  remi- 
niscence ahke,  in  the  pages  of  Thackeray,  than  from  reading  a  long 
array  of  citations,  of  isolated  passages  shorn  of  all  context,  of  the 
setting  that  gives  them  life  and  value,  on  individual  parts  of  Horace's 
writings. 


:  r  •  t  ^ 


